> Dude, you don't seem to get it. There are some people that can. not. be. helped. They WANT to be crazy

Lmao are you calling every mentally ill homeless person the joker? Fucking lol

I knew I shouldn’t have been taking this conversation seriously.

> And what if they'd rather not get help, and would rather keep screaming at Asian women and pissing on subway stairwells?

What makes you so sure they won’t?

> This isn't about helping the down and out bum with a heart of gold, it's about the guys that go into Starbucks bathrooms and smear their shit all over the walls.

Yeah, I was referring to them. It’s called the carrot and stick method. You just wanna use sticks.

> Also, if you're giving out free houses for staying sober I'll take one.

That’s not what I said. Jesus, you people can’t stop projecting and lying and using falsehoods to make up your arguments, can’t you?

> it may solve SOME problems but clearly it doesnt do it enough for the vast majority of people that are severely mentally ill

[citation needed]

> there is a ton of services for people IF they decide to take advantage of them

And they are likely underfunded and understaffed under this administration. Imagine if we actually had someone competent running things…

> Building in NY is hella expensive and reality is NO one with any influence or money wants to build that kind of housing.

So force them to. We have the power both in the city government and state government to completely overhaul rezoning laws and community councils. Why don’t we?

> After all who is going to spend possibly billions of dollars to house a population that let's be honest here only about 20% will ultimately be able to take care of themselves.

That’s the point of a social safety net, though. Not everything needs to turn a profit.

> While I'm on the topic assuming we do somehow build the housing what stops the vast majority of homeless in the country from migrating here to use these new housing?

Nothing, but then again, they’re being sent here anyway. If we give them housing, they’re more likely to contribute positively to the city instead of being on the street, y’know, like you people are so concerned about.

> On Expanding the safety net (Atleast in New York) in an administration that is filled with unqualified and honestly lazy workers is just asking for fraud and abuse

Then maybe we shouldn’t have drank the crime Kool aid and voted him in.

> Yeah, well if they can't live in society, then what do you want?

We can build them houses and give them the care they need as a stipulation for getting a house.

> If they want to be crazy and unrestricted, they can live out in a forest in the middle of nowhere, not in the middle of a city full of people.

None of them want that. Especially if they’re addicted to a substance or suffering mental health issues. Stop projecting onto them.

Adams’ plan doesn’t give them that either. You’d be surprised how much social support and trust building will solve the problem.

Are you saying that as an argument against supportive housing? Because that’s already what’s going to happen under Adams’ plan.

Do you not know what supportive housing is?

Because more housing means more supportive housing programs, which will help these people take care of themselves.

The answer is literally as simple as building more housing and expanding the social safety net. That’s all progressives have been advocating for this entire time.

Lmao it’s hilarious how you just want to force these people to ascribe to your cruel worldview of the ends justifying the means. That’s not how people work.

Okay, give them a raise, then.

Ffs that’s not what progressives are advocating for and you know it. Jesus Christ this fascist gaslighting has to stop.

But that’s the problem. The plan is the system I’m talking about. The hospital system doesn’t have the ability to provide long-term care for these individuals, so they’ll more likely than not end up back in the street.

But it doesn’t get them off the street. That’s my whole point.

And those same voters voted in a progressive city council and also the rest of those positions, so clearly it’s not a rejection of their policies like you think

Either way, it shows you that stupidity does not choose any particular race. PoC can make bad decisions with their elected leaders.

Action doesn’t matter if it doesn’t accomplish anything, though.

Exactly. This will just turn into a revolving door of homeless people being committed into a hospital system and then being spit back out after being stabilized with no long-term care.

It’s all just an attempt on Adams’ part to save face after being caught at the wheel on the crime issue.

See, but that’d be sensible, not “swagger.”

Forget the whole civil liberties bit and answer this: Please tell me how a system with no plan for long-term mental health care for the homeless is actually a good idea.

Lmao Eric Adams is not a bleeding heart progressive, my friend. You people voted him and his tough on crime persona into office. You should take a long hard look at yourself knowing that.

You think this will? Do you not have a condition that needs medication?

The short term and long term solutions are the same. Build more supportive housing and halfway homes for the hospital system to send these people to.

Sure, but my point is that “involuntary admission” is not actually gonna help people. You have the luxury of having insurance that covers both a psychiatrist and a psychologist. Homeless people don’t get that. Hence my saying. We need something more substantial and long-lasting than throwing them in a psych ward and pumping them full of anti-psychotics until they’re stable just to spit them back out onto the street.

It’s not a short term solution because they haven’t actually been treated. Those drugs will wear off, and we’ll be back to square one. In what world would that be seen as a solution?